- Has your national competition authority published guidelines on competition compliance programmes (“CCPs”)? If so, what are the key components of an effective CCP?
- Are there any recent cases in your jurisdiction where the NCA/competent courts have discussed the impact of CCPs?
- What arguments have been taken into account in relation to a CCP? Has the fact that a company has a CCP been assessed in terms of the effort made or the results achieved, i.e. the efficiency of the programme? Is the focus on future changes in CCPs or on existing programmes?
- Has the role of the management and/or employees of the company been assessed with respect to preventing, participating in, detecting and reporting violations, or remediating violations? Is there a link between the role of the company's management and/or employees and an effective CCP?
- Has the fact that an undertaking has a CCP been helpful in reducing a fine for an infringement of competition law? What facts, arguments or commitments were used to justify the reduction and what is the maximum reduction that can be granted? If a reduction is not granted, why not?
- Are CCPs (their adoption or updating) used as evidence for "self-cleaning" measures when an economic operator risks being excluded from a public procurement procedure for collusive behaviour?
- Please indicate any additional considerations / rules, trends that are important in your country in relation to CCPs.
- Are there legal developments on the horizon in relation to CCPs?
jurisdiction
1. Has your national competition authority published guidelines on competition compliance programmes (“CCPs”)? If so, what are the key components of an effective CCP?
In July 2014, the Croatian Competition Agency (“Croatian NCA”) issued guidelines on creating CCPs for the companies. However, these guidelines are relatively brief and provide only broad recommendations and general principles related to competition law compliance, without taking into account specific factors such as a company’s size, industry, or the particular markets in which it operates. Some of the key recommendations concern carrying out risk assessment, incorporating compliance rules in corporate documents, education and trainings for management and employees, reporting, advising and supervision procedures.
2. Are there any recent cases in your jurisdiction where the NCA/competent courts have discussed the impact of CCPs?
The Croatian NCA has recognized CCPs as one of the effective measures proposed by undertakings in the context of commitment decisions. There are a few cases between 2019 until 2024 where the Croatian NCA has accepted CCPs as part of the commitments to address alleged anti-competitive agreements and abuses of dominant positions in, e.g., the beverage production industry and forestry sector. In each case, the Croatian NCA, having accepted CCPs along with other measures, has decided not to proceed with further formal proceedings.
3. What arguments have been taken into account in relation to a CCP? Has the fact that a company has a CCP been assessed in terms of the effort made or the results achieved, i.e. the efficiency of the programme? Is the focus on future changes in CCPs or on existing programmes?
So far, CCPs have been considered as one of the measures under commitment decisions, with a focus on the company’s effort to adopt compliance mechanisms and demonstrate its commitment to adhering to competition rules through the implementation of such a program.
4. Has the role of the management and/or employees of the company been assessed with respect to preventing, participating in, detecting and reporting violations, or remediating violations? Is there a link between the role of the company's management and/or employees and an effective CCP?
Since CCPs have been considered as part of commitment decisions, those roles have not been specifically assessed. However, the guidelines on creating CCPs emphasise the crucial role of the management in the implementation and promotion of the CCP among employees. The guidelines also emphasize the importance of educating employees about competition law compliance in general, as well as about the specific content of the CCP.
5. Has the fact that an undertaking has a CCP been helpful in reducing a fine for an infringement of competition law? What facts, arguments or commitments were used to justify the reduction and what is the maximum reduction that can be granted? If a reduction is not granted, why not?
CCPs have not been taken into account when deciding on the fine reduction (probably because they are not prescribed by law as one of mitigating factors). To the best of our knowledge, CCPs have only been considered as one of the measures under commitment decisions.
6. Are CCPs (their adoption or updating) used as evidence for "self-cleaning" measures when an economic operator risks being excluded from a public procurement procedure for collusive behaviour?
We are not aware of any relevant cases were CCPs have been used as evidence for "self-cleaning" measures, but they could be used for that purpose.
7. Please indicate any additional considerations / rules, trends that are important in your country in relation to CCPs.
Aside from the fact that companies often propose CCPs as one of the measures in commitment decisions, we are not aware of any additional considerations / rules, or trends in relation to CCPs. Furthermore, there are currently no indications that this is expected to change soon.
8. Are there legal developments on the horizon in relation to CCPs?
No upcoming legal developments in Croatia in relation to CCPs.
